Pope Francis reaffirms Vatican’s call for reform of US nuns’ group

Pope Francis has given his backing to the Vatican’s reform of the US-based Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR).

Archbishop Gerhard Müller, prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, told the nuns’ group that he had “discussed the doctrinal assessment with Pope Francis, who reaffirmed the findings of the assessment and the programme of reform for this conference of major superiors”.

The doctrinal congregation met the LCWR leadership and Seattle Archbishop Peter Sartain, who had been assigned by the Vatican to oversee the reform, last week. In a statement on its website, LCRW said that “the conversation was open and frank”.

LCWR is a Maryland-based umbrella group that claims to have about 1,500 leaders of US women’s communities as members. Last April, the doctrinal congregation issued an assessment of LCWR, citing “serious doctrinal problems which affect many in consecrated life.”

The assessment called for the organisation’s reform to ensure its fidelity to Catholic teaching in areas including abortion, euthanasia, women’s ordination and homosexuality. LCWR’s canonical status is granted by the Vatican.

These “nuns” are pagans really; certainly in moral terms. Either get them back into their habits and impose upon them the old disciplines of the religious life, or excommunicate the lot of them.

anon

A more attentive and less neglectful Vatican?
Genuinely concerned British Catholics may wish to consider the present circumstances of female Religious Orders; doing so, for example, by visiting our own Portiuncula at St Clare’s Convent in Clay Cross.

Peter

Off topic, given the avid attention the CH give to Pope Francis’ sermons, it is noteworthy that they have not commented on his latest Sunday homily at St Paul outside the walls.

In it, Francis said that the hypocrisy of clergy and faithful, between what they say and what they do, is undermining the credibility of the Church in the world.

Pretty strong stuff and it is surprising that the CH didn’t follow up on it. They probably didn’t want to ruffle any feathers, which is certainly what this Pope isn’t afraid to do.

An onlooker

I do hope so. That would at least be a step in the right direction. It seems almost beyond belief that women are still having to deal with aggressive and misogynistic male posturing under the guise of self-righteous indignation.

South Saxon

I believe that these orders of “nuns” in the United States are in rapid decline in terms of membership as the hippy generation of the 1960s begins to die. By contrast, traditional orders are, I am told, receiving a healthy number of vocations. It is going take a generation, but the errors of the 1960s will eventually be corrected.

ZuZuLamarr

I second, third and million that!

Sara_TMS_again

Well, I love Pope Francis, but it is simply the case that the LCWR has been treated unjustly by the Vatican, and if Francis was content simply to reaffirm what the CDF under Levada did, he should think again. Women throughout the world are watching this case.

However, before concluding that what Muller said really does represent Francis’ considered view, let us remember two things:

1.The CDF, and Muller in particular, had just been humiliated by having the G8 of super-cardinals appointed, in effect demoting it and him from its previous position as the leading papal advisory body, and him as its leader. It is not unlikely that Francis was avoiding further humiliating Muller by not undermining his authority further, or that Muller was simply seeking to reassert his importance over someone, somewhere, or a bit of both.

2. Francis need only to have affirmed some of the report’s findings for Muller to report his views as he did. He surely did not reaffirm with any knowledge the report’s lunatic misunderstanding of Sr Laurie Brink’s talk, for example, which makes the report the clearest self-refutation one could ask for.

I suspect we have not seen the last of this, and that this will not be Francis’ last word on it.

Sara_TMS_again

For God’s sake, we’re talking about human beings here, who have given their lives to God in the way that they understood themselves to be called to do, through thick and thin, through all sorts of changes and confusions. Shame on you for mocking that. If you do half as much good in your life as some of those sisters have done, you will have cause to be very thankful.

South Saxon

Sara. I do not doubt their dedication nor that they believe that they are doing God’s will. However, they are gravely in error, having abandoned much the religious life and acting against the teaching of the Church. The LCWR is a problem that cannot be ignored.

I do not mock them; I grieve for them in their error.

ZuZuLamarr

Spot on.

Benedict Carter

Given their lives to God is the LAST thing these women have done.

An onlooker

It’s worrying that people continue to be preoccupied with appearance when it comes to women.

If women religious get a little more attention, it’s because so many orders have been so aggressive in abandoning their habits.

Athelstane

There’s little to misunderstand about Sr. Brink’s talk. Even in context, her statements are deeply problematic – and she was was far from the only such speaker at LCWR events to trigger alarms about what has happened at LCWR.

Something has gone very wrong with many women religious orders over the last 45 years. If anything, the Vatican correction has been too long in coming, and too mild in its correction. Some of these orders are, frankly, beyond saving. And too many are running schools which perpetrate heterodox teachings and practices, risking the shipwreck of souls.

An onlooker

Surely it all depends on whether their habits are good or bad!

ZuZuLamarr

Amen!

The sooner these ageing hippies fade away, the better. I, for one, am sick to death of them moaning and whingeing about being told off by the Holy Father for their disgraceful attitudes.
I’m sick to death of them. Full stop.

Sadly, though, they are too old, too complacent and too comfortable in their faded bell-bottoms or sharp suits to accept any admonishment from the Holy Father. To think that the respective orders they joined on the aching backs of hard-working nuns of the past whose founders toiled in their labour of Love of God are going to the wall because they decided to burn their wimples whilst Women’s Lib (another con-job and falsehood) decided to burn their upper undergarments at the same time!

As long as 30 years ago (I wonder if this is still the case), orders such as the Missionaries of Charity (founded by Blessed Teresa of Calcutta) were inundated by young women from all walks of life who were attracted to their work amongst the poorest of the poor and their simple yet austere routine.
I believe that orders such as these are getting more of the lion’s share of the vocations to the priest hood and religious life today. Thanks be to God and His Holy Mother! Not before time.

When someone I knew well was in the middle of considering her vocation to the religious life, the sisters from the local convent came across as somewhat bitter that the said person-I-knew made it abundantly clear she did not wish to join their order.

Their numbers were not attracting new blood. They oft protested that they were doing as good a job at looking after the poor in the community where they were based as anything Mother Teresa’s sisters did.

So, why did this young woman decide to seek her calling elsewhere and was seemingly attracted to the most austere order she could pick?

The miffed and ‘embittered’ sisters who lost out on this woman’s vocation decided to bin their wimples until they eventually looked like everyone else i.e. another housewife shopping in Tesco’s. They formed cliques amongst parishioners and had little or no time for the rest who didn’t appear to ‘fit’. Their views on Church Teaching left a lot to be desired.

The young woman tried her very best to give her reasons nicely but ended up being pretty direct and blunt with it.

The Missionaries of Charity adhere to the Magisterium. Their sisters go about their business amongst the communities where they are being sent without the need to ditch their habits. If they ever attract hostility and abuse because of what they wear, then it is borne patiently for the love of Our Blessed Lord. They rely on the goodness and charity of those they meet to keep themselves and those in their care going. Their prayer life is full of joy. They are never without a smile when you encounter them and have the keenest sense of humour to dispel any adversity.

St Louis de Montfort wrote about jealousy and dodgy convents centuries ago in his book The Secret of The Rosary. The vain, dodgy ones eventually ended up in not a very nice place.

This phenomenon is not new … but there are ways of making these orders pull their collective socks up.

And that is a good talking-to by Pope Francis.

bluesuede

The multi-billion dollar garment and magazine , movie , television, art, videos, dvd’s and on and on industries, would hope that you are preoccupied with the appearance of women, when it comes to spending your money.

If a picture says a thousand words, how much more do women say by the way they dress?

bluesuede

I agree with you and South Saxon. When sisters and religious women changed their habits in the 70’s in response to the pressures to modernize, the only ones that kept the short dresses and bare heads, were, but not all, losing vocations. Partly because, their focus, message and lifestyle became too worldly and had a little too much feminism. Vocations fizzled out.

So why join, when the focus of the sister’s lives is the same as what the women were living in the world? Where all the focus is on themselves.

The real attraction to religious life is the total commitment of love for Jesus Christ, knowing that they do His Will, by their love, prayer and sacrifices for humanity. Jesus promised that they would be rewarded 100 fold. Want proof? Just look at their peace and joy! God bless them.

An onlooker

Women are to blame for how they are exploited by the media, women are to blame for how they dress. How lucky for men that they are untouched by all this!!

Mary360

The CDF wasn’t demoted by the G8. The CDF was never the leading “advisory” body. It’s the leading peer review body. It has actual responsibilities for the life of the Church. The Secretariat of State has more to say to the Pope. CDF decisions are made by bishops and cardinals from all over the world – not just Levada, Muller or the staff. The blaming of one individual for CDF decisions seems to be one of the misunderstandings. A group of people decided what to do. Collegiality actually already exists in how the Vatican operates.

Sr. Brink gave an academic talk in which she asked the Sisters present to reflect upon which state of being their congregation was, including being Post-Christian. In reading the paper, it is clear that Sister Brink is not advocating anything BUT it is also clear that she and others who might affirm they are Post-Christian, think this is an okay state of being for women religious. Therefore, her talk really does promote an understanding of Church which is detrimental to them as well as to the rest of us who make up the body of Christ. I don’t think the CDF reading of her talk is lunatic. I don’t believe it is the basis of the decision either – it is one example of many.

The LCWR’s last speaker was Barbara Marx Hubbard. The talk wasn’t Catholic. There is beauty and truth in Catholic Spirituality. Why don’t the sister’s explore and promote this? Why do they promote a vision that is incompatible with the faith for which they hold leadership positions? This is the fundamental nature of the discussions underway.

Why should I, a woman, follow women who do not lead? Frankly, it’s disheartening that the other women who they lead to such great individual work that doesn’t translate into works of faith, just works of social justice. Think of how they could transform our world if they combined real Catholic faith with their actions. New Age faith is fun, but it hasn’t stood up to the test of time, nor is it the truth.

Pope Francis isn’t a fool and he doesn’t seem like someone who tip toes around anything. He has been kind to a living emeritus Pope but has already discarded many things that Benedict did which has caused the press and others to publicly mock the former Pope. He didn’t think about the ex-Pope’s feelings or those who thought the former Pope right in what he did when he decided to do things his own way. Why would he save Muller’s face or the CDF’s face if he thought they were wrong. Muller wasn’t even on board when the decision got made so why would changing the decision “humiliate” him.

I think that it is disrespectful of Francis and the LCWR to think that the Pope is reaffirmed something without considering the case, you’ve relegated him to being just a bureaucratic “yes” man.

Sister S

All nuns do these things. But not all nuns want to “move beyond Jesus”. If someone does not hold the vows, they professed, then it’s time to stop pretending.

Sister S

The church has drawn the line between the civil and the sacramental. They have the balance pat down. Now some progressives want to undo this, and confuse the two.

It’s beyond belief that people have to deal with aggressive secular interference in sacramental issues.

Sister S

I prefer habits, but have to disagree. The issue is faithfulness to the charism of their communities. And not all communities in the more traditional CSMWR, wear habits either. These things can be decided by the community, depending on their charism.

Sister S

Sister Sara Butler is a member of the LCWR, and she agrees with the findings of the report.

“Today leading feminist sisters often take public stands against Church teaching. Some claim to have a “prophetic” vocation to eradicate injustices in the Church. Sr. Sara (Butler) responds that “it cannot be the prophetic vocation of apostolic religious to repudiate the ministerial priesthood and the hierarchical structure of the Church.”

Ironically, the LCWR leaders charged with main­taining ties with the hierarchy themselves support the “anti­hierarchical option” and give their allegiance to the People of God, a chimerical Church that is a “discipleship of equals.”

Sr. Sara notes that while many women religious are influenced in their thinking by these ruling feminists, others remain aloof and silent like Cordelia, fearful of speaking out. Sr. Elizabeth writes that “the ongoing, functional tutelage of LCWR” has brought “community after community” under the control of “progressive leadership who belong to that conference, which systematically co-opted the entire course of renewal by effecting a ‘corporate transformation’ into a liberal-feminist-ecological-social-justice-oriented agenda.”

These leaders live a “corporate executive lifestyle” while publicly challenging Catholic doctrine and worship; they seem not to be accountable to anyone for squandering their religious orders’ physical and spiritual heritage.

Nope. What you do not know, is that anybody can develop, a charism, but not everybody can bring it to life. This is the work of the Holy Spirit. The ones who are not succeeding, need to stop blaming others and engaging in self-pity, “poor oppressed me” and be more introspective.

As my spiritual director told me, “If God wants you to be somewhere nothing on earth, will keep you away, and if God does not want you to be somewhere, nothing on earth, will get you in.”

Athelstane

Virtually all CMSWR orders do wear habits, however, and all the new orders joining currently do require them.

As for charisms: that’s the problem, isn’t it? Many of these orders have effectively *redefined* their charisms. And often those charisms are not only very different from what they once were, they’re often in profound tension with Church doctrine.

Habits are only an indicator of spiritual health and orthodoxy. So are other practices abandoned by many LCWR orders: communal living and communal devotional life.

Sister S

The orders can decide if they want to have habits or not or what habits they want etc. Those joining them have to abide by what has been set down in their constitutions. It’s also unlikely that someone will join a community, they are not attracted too. The Holy spirit works on spiritual attraction.

I do agree strongly with community living and prayers. This is vital and healthy as opposed to living on your own in an apartment.

Benedict Carter

Good post.

bluesuede

To a certain extent, you’re right. Women are the ones who usually choose the clothes they want to wear. I even agree with you that, women are partially to blame for how they’re exploited by the media.
I prefer the modest habit of the sisters and nuns.

Men are not entirely untouched by all this, as you say. Men, in increasing numbers, are becoming obsessed with their own image and hedonism.

An onlooker

How would you feel if the church was run wholly and exclusively by women?

Sister S

No church is run this way. The church is not run wholly and exclusively by men either. It depends on what you mean by the term run.

ZuZuLamarr

That’s so true.
Besides, I only ever trust a nun who wears a habit and is obedient to The Magisterium.
The others neither measure up or have learned to grow up.

Kate Ann

And you would know. I pray that the God I worship has nothing to do with the one you champion. Reading your posts it seems you are obsessed with justice, rather like islam, mercy gets no look in.

Thomas Poovathinkal SSP

ALL those who follow Jesus the Lord showing themselves to be such in every area of their life is a very good idea and ideal. If the Pope insists on it, we in India would prefer saffron colour for our dress.

Thomas Poovathinkal SSP

Please provide a link to it.

THANKS.

Miss

Too true. Too true, sadly. All the hate on this comments page shows how much Catholics really despise women. No wonder there are no religious vocations – what is the point spending your life being treated like dirt?

Miss

It would be great! Then we could spend the next 2,000 years telling MEN they are inferior, secondary, subordinate, passive, weak, dependent, useless, etc.